MCMI-III as a treatment outcome measure for psychiatric inpatients

Piersma, Harry L.; Boes, Janna L.

doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4679(199712)53:8<825::aid-jclp6>3.0.co;2-e

Cited by 14 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Diagnosis of PDs is different due to various used instruments and concern of clinician for considering of this category of disorders (Alnaes, &, Torgersen, 1988; cited in Hills, 1995;Piersma, & Boes, 1998). Diagnosis of PDs is time consuming but it is necessary because concordance of PD with Axis I disorder impact on incidence, duration and treatment of the disorder (Widiger, & Rogers, 1989; Woody et al, 1985; cited in Hills, 1995).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of Personality Disorders and Clinical Syndromes Using the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III (MCMI-III) in an Iranian Clinical Sample

Dadfar¹

2017

IJBECS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personality objective inventories are commonly used for diagnosis of personality disorders. Personality assessment is effective in diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of psychiatric outpatients and in patients. Comorbid personality disorders and clinical syndromes may be more worth condition of the patients. The present study aimed to examine the diagnosis of personality disorders and clinical syndromes using the Farsi version of Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III (3rd ed.; MCMI-III) in Iranian psychiatric outpatients. This was a descriptive cross-sectional study. The subjects of the project were 737 psychiatric outpatients. They were referred to the psychiatric and psychological clinics at the School of Behavioral Sciences and Mental Health-Tehran Institute of Psychiatry affiliated to Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. The subjects were selected using convenience sampling during years of 2010-2015 and evaluated by the MCMI-III computerized Farsi version. Data were analyzed by descriptive methods and t test using SPSS/WIN 16.0 program. Results showed that the most frequent of personality disorders were Depressive (2B), Compulsive (7), and Histrionic (4); with double code types of Depressive-Dependent (2B3);and Histrionic-Depressive (42B) combinations. The most frequent of moderate clinical syndrome were Anxiety (A), and Dysthymia (D) and the severe syndromes was Thought Disorder (SS); with double codes of clinical syndromes of Anxiety-PostTraumatic Stress Disorder (AR). There were significant differences between women and men patients in mean scores of some MCMI-III scales. Women had higher scores in Validity Scales of Disclosure (X) and Debasement (Z) than men. Depressive, Passive-Aggressive (Negativistic) (8A), Self-Defeating (8B) and Borderline (C) personality disorders were the most common in women than men. By contrast, Compulsive (7) personality disorder was the most common in men compare to women. Anxiety, Somatoform (H), Bipolar: Manic (N), Dysthymia (D), and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (R), Thought Disorder (SS), and Major Depression Disorder (CC) were the most common in women than men. The prevalence of diagnosis personality patterns and clinical syndromes in Iranian psychiatric outpatients is high and this should be taken into account in their assessment and treatment planning. Using of available sample and lack of random sample; possibility of comorbidity of other mental disorders with main diagnosis are limitations of the study. Utilization of item response theory (IRT); Structural Clinical Interviews for DSM Axis I and Axis II (SCID-I and SCID-II) along with MCMI-III; and MCMI-IV in an Iranian clinical sample are recommended.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of Personality Disorders and Clinical Syndromes Using the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III (MCMI-III) in an Iranian Clinical Sample

Dadfar¹

2017

IJBECS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, a literature search revealed only six studies that have examined the stability of a self-report questionnaire assessing the DSM-IV PD constructs. Even this literature might be deemed limited, as studies typically considered only one type of stability (i.e., rank-order), and most used non-clinical samples (e.g., Okada & Oltmanns, 2009) or reassessed over very brief intervals (e.g., 1–6 weeks; Millon, 1994; Ottosson et al, 2000; Piersma & Boes, 1997). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the temporal stability of self-report and interview assessed personality disorder.

Samuel

Hopwood

Ansell

et al. 2011

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Findings from several large-scale, longitudinal studies over the last decade have challenged the long held assumption that personality disorders (PDs) are stable and enduring. However, the findings, including those from the Collaborative Longitudinal Personality Disorders Study (CLPS; Gunderson et al., 2000), rely primarily upon results from semistructured interviews. As a result, less is known about the stability of PD scores from self-report questionnaires, which differ from interviews in important ways (e.g., source of the ratings, item development, and instrument length) that might increase temporal stability. The current study directly compared the stability of the DSM-IV PD constructs assessed via the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP – 2; Clark, Simms, Wu, & Casillas, in press) with those from the Diagnostic Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (DIPD-IV; Zanarini, Frankenburg, Sickel & Yong, 1996) over two years in a sample of 529 CLPS participants. Specifically, we compared dimensional and categorical representations from both measures in terms of rank-order and mean-level stability. Results indicated that the dimensional scores from the self-report questionnaire had significantly greater rank order (mean r = .69 versus .59) and mean-level (mean d = .21 versus .30) stability. In contrast, categorical diagnoses from the two measures evinced comparable rank-order (mean kappa = .38 versus .37) and mean-level stability (median prevalence rate decrease of 3.5% versus 5.6%). These findings suggest the stability of PD constructs depends at least partially on the method of assessment and are discussed in the context of previous research and future conceptualizations of personality pathology.

show abstract

“…In addition, the MCMI-III has been shown to be sensitive to treatment response (Piersma & Boes, 1997). The test-retest reliability for the MCMI-III Anxiety scale has been reported to range from .81 (Craig & Olson, 1998) to .54 (Piersma & Boes, 1997). The test-retest reliability for the MCMI-III Anxiety scale has been reported to range from .81 (Craig & Olson, 1998) to .54 (Piersma & Boes, 1997).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Psychometric Properties and Construct Validity of the MCMI-III Anxiety and Avoidant Personality Scales

Blais¹,

Holdwick²,

McLean³

et al. 2003

Journal of Personality Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI; Millon, 1983) is a commonly used self-report instrument designed to aid in the assessment of Axis I and Axis II disorders. Concerns have been expressed regarding the procedures used in the normative research for the current version of the MCMI (MCMI-III; Millon, 1994) leading to a call for additional validity research on the MCMI-III (Retzlaff, 1996). In this study, we investigated the psychometric properties of the MCMI-III's Anxiety and Avoidant personality scales in a sample of patients diagnosed with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) anxiety disorders. Our results suggest that the MCMI-III Avoidant scale is reliable (r =.89) and it was found to demonstrate appropriate convergent and divergent validity with other self-report measures. The MCMI-III Anxiety scale also showed adequate reliability (r =.78); however, our findings raise some concerns about the discriminant validity of this scale. A scale composed of the MCMI-III core anxiety items was found to have better discriminant validity. These findings are consistent with those reported by other researchers regarding the relationship between self-report measures of anxiety, avoidance, and depression. We conclude that the MCMI-III measures of anxiety and avoidance are consistent with other measures of these constructs and may provide valuable clinical information in this regard.

show abstract

MCMI-III as a treatment outcome measure for psychiatric inpatients

Cited by 14 publications

References 18 publications

Prevalence of Personality Disorders and Clinical Syndromes Using the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III (MCMI-III) in an Iranian Clinical Sample

Prevalence of Personality Disorders and Clinical Syndromes Using the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III (MCMI-III) in an Iranian Clinical Sample

Comparing the temporal stability of self-report and interview assessed personality disorder.

Exploring the Psychometric Properties and Construct Validity of the MCMI-III Anxiety and Avoidant Personality Scales

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About